I often wondered about these claims; why would Lompoc, a city of about 35,000 residents, need so much low-income housing?

Others have claimed that “the South Coast is exporting all of its problems to Lompoc.” They may be right.

Currently, seven projects (730 housing units) have been approved for development in Lompoc but are in limbo.

Developers have had a habit of promising “big tax revenue” and suggesting to willing council members that they will “build soon” if they will provide them with incentives.

By state mandate, 10 percent of these projects must be low-income units or the developer can contribute the construction cost to a fund to build the units elsewhere.

Any knowledgeable politician should be cautious concerning developers’ promises.

Mayoral candidate Jim Mosby thinks annexing Bailey Avenue to the west of Lompoc will fix the housing problem.

First, with more than 700 units in limbo, there isn’t a problem. Second, in my 15-plus years of experience as a planning commissioner, developers seem to want to get a project approved to raise the value of their land and then they sell it to someone else.

Besides, history shows the annexation of Bailey Avenue parcels has been controversial for decades and will face stiff opposition as it moves forward.

Let’s examine the claim that “the South Coast is exporting all of its problems to Lompoc.”

Recently, a developer of an approved project proposed converting nearly all of a 44-unit project to low-income units. He envisioned 39 low-income units instead of the 10 percent he is normally obligated to provide, and was applying for tax credits.

This conversion, if approved, would provide a substantial profit to the developer because even though the residents wouldn’t be paying market rate, he would be collecting it via taxpayer subsidies.

In the meantime, the city wouldn’t get any property tax benefit from the project for 55 years unless it was converted back to market rate units.

In a letter to the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee opposing the proposed action, the city revealed some interesting facts.

Lompoc has a population of around 35,000 people after you subtract the federal prison population from the census figures; both Santa Maria and Santa Barbara have more than 100,000 people.

Currently in Lompoc, 76 percent of the multi-family units — that’s 76 of every 100 units — are characterized as affordable, while Santa Maria has only 6 percent and Santa Barbara 5 percent. Other communities are also in the 2-5 percent range.

According to the city, many of the tax-credit projects in the city “have a history of high code enforcement cases” and “fall into disrepair between financing infusions. As of Aug. 13, 2018, there are 73 active code compliance cases in an apartment complex with 124 units.”

The same community leaders who strongly support more low-income housing projects also think higher density development is a must. This means they want to cram more people into smaller spaces.

This often creates friction between neighbors who simply don’t have enough space to live wholesome lives.

Of course, some of these advocates are in the real estate business and could stand to profit if more units are built per acre.

The General Fund has a revenue problem; calls for service to public safety services are increasing every year. One low-income project has had several attempted murders and other violent assaults on the last few years, many more than the rest of the city combined.

I think it’s reasonable to say that before another low-income, tax-credit project is approved in our city that other communities need to step up to the plate and level the playing field. But, if history is any indicator, the state will ignore these figures and approve this project.

When the City Council recently disapproved the conversion of a 200-plus unit project to low-income status, the appointed California Tax Credit Allocation Committee overruled the decision claiming “there is a low-income housing crisis in California.”

That may be true, but the only “low-income housing crisis” in Lompoc is a glut of these units that is strangling our city while other communities aren’t sharing the load.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name

Last name

Email

Select your monthly membership

Red-Tailed Hawk $5/month

Cooper's Hawk $10/month

Red-Shouldered Hawk $25/month

Or choose an annual membership

Birds of a Feather $52/year

×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Credit or debit card

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover

One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.